...An eclectic mix of local Politics, Education, Community Affairs, Environment, History, Birding,Jamaica Bay, Ridgewood Reservoir, Forest Park, and other assorted items of interest...
Concentrating on the Borough of Queens in New York City...and the neighborhoods of Ozone Park, Howard Beach, Woodhaven, Richmond Hill and South Ozone Park...and Community Boards 5, 6, 9 and 10...

Wednesday, February 9, 2011

Rep Weiner & 73 House Members Call on Thomas to Recuse Himself from Health Care Reform Case

Impartiality Questioned after Revelations of Financial Gain and Disclosure Lapses

Following reports that the spouse of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is a lobbyist who has gained financially from efforts to overturn health care reform, a conflict of interest the associate justice failed to disclose, Rep. Anthony Weiner (D – Queens and Brooklyn) and 73 of his House colleagues sent a letter to Justice Thomas calling on him to recuse himself from any deliberations on the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Full text of the letter below:

The Honorable Justice Clarence Thomas

United States Supreme Court Building

1 First Street Northeast

Washington D.C., DC 20543

Dear Justice Thomas:

As an Associate Justice, you are entrusted with the responsibility to exercise the highest degree of discretion and impartiality when deciding a case. As Members of Congress, we were surprised by recent revelations of your financial ties to leading organizations dedicated to lobbying against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. We write today to respectfully ask that you maintain the integrity of this court and recuse yourself from any deliberations on the constitutionality of this act.

The appearance of a conflict of interest merits recusal under federal law. From what we have already seen, the line between your impartiality and you and your wife's financial stake in the overturn of healthcare reform is blurred. Your spouse is advertising herself as a lobbyist who has “experience and connections” and appeals to clients who want a particular decision - they want to overturn health care reform. Moreover, your failure to disclose Ginny Thomas’s receipt of $686,589 from the Heritage Foundation, a prominent opponent of healthcare reform, between 2003 and 2007 has raised great concern.

This is not the first case where your impartiality was in question. As Common Cause points out, you “participated in secretive political strategy sessions, perhaps while the case was pending, with corporate leaders whose political aims were advanced by the [5-4] decision” on the Citizens United case. Your spouse also received an undisclosed salary paid for by undisclosed donors as CEO of Liberty Central, a 501(c)(4) organization that stood to benefit from the decision and played an active role in the 2010 elections.

Given these facts, there is a strong conflict between the Thomas household’s financial gain through your spouse’s activities and your role as an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court. We urge you to recuse yourself from this case. If the US Supreme Court's decision is to be viewed as legitimate by the American people, this is the only correct path.

Technorati

Today.com

all blogs

Amazing Counters

Blogarama

Blogdire

blogging fusion

blog patrol

Blog Top Spots

extreme tracking

Feed nuts

Globe of Blogs

The Good Blogs

ice rocket

StatCounter

FAIR USE NOTICE

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I have posted it here in an effort to advance the understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, social justice and other issues. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. The material in this site is provided for educational and informational purposes only.